Steve's personal agenda continues

[tree]

March 25, 2009
CITY CONTINUES TO APPROVE DEVELOPMENTS WITHOUT SUFFICIENT WATER RIGHTS

The Yelm City Council heard from this writer last night about the fact that they continue to issue Plat Developments without sufficient water rights.

Mayor Pro-tem Isom recoiled at my mention of the moratorium issue, saying that my statement was a mis-characterization and he could see through me [and my motives]. I told him I merely quoted the Council's Minutes of April 13, 2005:
"MOTION BY BOB ISOM, SECONDED BY JOE BAKER THAT NO MORATORIAMS (sic) BE IMPOSED AND THAT THE ISSUE NOT BE BROUGHT BEFORE COUNCIL AGAIN. CARRIED."

When the issue of approving the John's Meadow Final Plat was brought up for questions, there was only one from Council Member Pat Fetterly who asked Staff if the city had enough water to support 40+ homes in this development. Assistant Planner Nisha Box never directly answered the question, rather stated all of the information is in the Staff report. Ms. Fetterly said "Thank you," and the vote on this Plat passed unanimously.
If Council would have read the Staff Report on John's Meadow, they would have noted this:
"The City currently does not hold sufficient water rights to serve all undeveloped lots within its water service area, but has determined that the proposed means of water supply for this final subdivision is adequate..."

THINGS WILL ONLY CHANGE WHEN THE CITIZENS SAY "ENOUGH'!

WHAT CAN YOU DO?
Write to:
Vicki Cline, Compliance & Enforcement
Water Resources Program
Southwest Regional Office
Dept. of Ecology (Ms. Cline's office oversees Yelm)
VWIN461@ECY.WA.GOV

Tell Ms. Cline that you are writing as a citizen and that you are requesting enforcement of Yelm's continual
plat approvals going beyond the city's current water allocation and you want your letter to be included in the official public record of the City of Yelm's Water Mitigation Plan.

Here is my letter for the record, that along with the recording of tonight's public Council exchange will be added to Yelm's Water Mitigation Plan at the State Dept. of Ecology & Dept. of Health requesting enforcement to show how the Yelm City Council continues to defy state water regulations:

March 24, 2009
The Dept. of Ecology verified that Yelm pumped 756 acre feet per year (acy) of an allocated 796.66 acy in 2008. An acre-foot is about 325,000 gallons ? which, for the City of Yelm is about enough water to serve 3.5 homes for a year, according to the DOE. Doing the basic math then, the City would be over that limit with the current water rights they hold in withdrawing an additional 40 acre-feet (796.66-756 = 40.66 underage). That 40 acre-feet X 3.5 homes per acre-foot = 140 homes. That said, Yelm has many development permits already in the works & approved that have not yet been hooked-up to Yelm's water supply well in excess of that number; 568 alone on hold under Court order.

The City has applied to the DOE through the Thurston County Conservation Board for the transfer of approximately 150 acre feet of water that the City currently controls through a lease agreement. While the City expects this transfer to be accomplished at some point in 2009, there is no guarantee that will happen.
The City has also submitted mitigation plans to the DOE for new water rights, of which the City expects approval for the first 554 acre feet between 2010 and 2012. That is 1 to 3 years in the future, if approved at all. Yet the city's Water Mitigation Plan has not been approved and will most probably not be approved until all concerns are met. Wishing or hoping the Plan will be approved will not make it so, as there are alot of hurdles in the Plan to overcome.

For the city to continue issuing approvals for plat developments with ongoing litigation concerning water availability at final plat is quite remarkable & illustrates the city's intent to the ultimate degree. What you are in-essence saying is you don't have to show an adequate water supply by final plat approval, therefore thumbing your nose at a State requirement, the State's DOE, Dept. of Health, the Attorney General's Amicus Brief and a Thurston County Superior Court Final Judgment that is still active until the appeal is completed.

I am on-the-record tonight to say this action is being noticed and will be presented before the State DOE, Dept, of Health and State Attorney General's office. The city would show good judgment by not approving further developments until all components are in place and the current appeal has been determined and is behind you. If you continue to do so, you run the risk of additional litigation from landowners, developers, and citizen activists.
Your own Staff Report [John?s Meadows Final Plat, dated March 2, 2009] says, "The City currently does not hold sufficient water rights to serve all undeveloped lots within its water service area, but has determined that the proposed means of water supply for this final subdivision is adequate..."
Really? Since when do water rights applications equate having water to serve all of the plats this City has approved or will approve without those in place?

[Ed. Note: The Staff Report for John's Meadows Final Plat goes on to specify:
"If the City is unable to provide potable water at the time a building permit application is submitted for any structure within this subdivision, the permit will not be issued until such time as evidence of an adequate water supply can be made..."
What does that mean?
That says the city will allow the developer to go ahead and put in power, phone, water, sewer and roads and then when they go to apply for a permit to build a home, if the city cannot provide water, the developer cannot build until the city can show evidence of adequate water.
The city can now say we told you, the information is all in our Staff report.
WHY WOULD A BUILDER DEVELOP UNDER SUCH CONDITIONS?]

On April 13, 2005, Yelm area resident Bill Hashim requested the City Council place a moratorium on any further building here until the Critical Area's Update could be completed - a moratorium that would have placed the then-proposed Wal-Mart Superstore approval process on hold until more study and compliance with the Growth Management Hearings Board could be accomplished.

So outraged was the City Council at the continuing public outcry about a Wal-Mart here, then City Council member Isom immediately motioned for a moratorium on moratoriums so the name Wal-Mart and/or big box stores could not be brought before the council again. Council member Joe Baker seconded the motion.

That act was in addition to Yelm receiving the egregious Jefferson Muzzle Award for not permitting the public to mention the word Wal-Mart in Council Chambers. Interesting that a Wal-Mart was allowed to be built here with their traffic mitigated by an unfunded Bypass that was supposed to be operational within 7 years of the store?s opening and has now been postponed for at least 20 years, thanks in-part to the city?s push to move r-o-w & engineering funding from Phase 2 (Wal-Mart section) of the Bypass to Phase 1.

I propose rescinding the moratorium on moratoriums and that this City Council start to take a look at a growth moratorium, just as Lacey & Tumwater are doing to bring their growth in alignment with State law on a municipality's use of allocated resources.


Stephen R. Klein


_______________________

and can anyone tell me why there is a mayor pro-tem?
what happened to Mayor Harding?

[David McCarthy]

tree,

Stephen Klein is obviously 'attention starved"...and one of Judith's lap poodles.....
I am sure he would approve to see his viewpoint regularly posted on EMF.

Perhaps I am missing something here...

David.